Stormwater agreements change fee arrangement

New stormwater management agreements between Beaufort County, Bluffton and Hilton Head Island would feature a funding formula tied to hard surfaces in the municipalities.

Fees paid by the towns would be based on “equivalent single family units” rather than a fixed percentage that cost the municipalities more in administrative costs under the previous stormwater management agreements.

The proposed intergovernmental agreements were endorsed Monday by the County Council Natural Resources Committee. They are scheduled for adoption by the full council by the end of September when the old agreements expire.

Hilton Head town officials drafted a new 10-year agreement, which will serve as a template for other county municipalities.

The Hilton Head Town Council has approved its agreement; the Bluffton Town Council plans to adopt its agreement alongside the county process.

Intergovernmental agreements with Beaufort and Port Royal are in the works but currently are tied up in the form-based code adoption process in those municipalities.

The agreements call for a fee per single family unit (SFU) of $2.80, which is based on the county Stormwater Management Utility estimated administrative budget of $309,000 for fiscal year 2012. The fee would be adjusted in subsequent years based on itemized budget estimates.

“These SFU numbers will change as jurisdictions grow but allows for equitable allocation of management costs based on a measure of impervious surface,” according to a memo by county Stormwater Manager Dan Ahern.

“This will eliminate a major concern in the old agreement that had a fixed percentage, which led to increased administrative fees as a municipality increased their SFU rate,” Ahern wrote. “Now we will annually determine a cost per SFU based on budgeted Stormwater Utility Management costs.”

The draft agreements also incorporate water quality control recommendations that “minimum water quality controls in jurisdictions must be protective enough to reach and maintain state designated water uses.”

The provision addresses concern about adequate controls in various jurisdictions “without dictating to the municipalities that they must adopt county requirements,” according to Ahern’s memo.